Angela Connell-Richards: 0:34

Okay, let's get started with this. Welcome back to the RTO Superhero Podcast. I'm Angela Connell-Richards and today we're diving into Division 1 of Vet Workforce Management when it comes to Quality Area 3, within the new standards, and I have our special guest, maychek, here with us today with his expertise and background. Maychek and I have been in the training industry for a long time, so we've seen things come and go Young at heart and then come back again. Yes, we're definitely young at heart, but what we're seeing is some things come back again, but vet workforce something very different, very new from what we've had before. And so we'll dive straight in first with that Division 1 VET workforce management Maciek. What do you see is going to be the major differences with how RTOs are running currently, to what they're going to need to implement under VET workforce management?

Maciek Fibrich: 1:40

Yeah, look good to be back, and I think the concept of the current standards we focus a lot on clauses 1.13, 14, 15 and 16 as is and we don't often go past that you know, working under workforce management, not just your trainers and assessors, and I think that's probably the biggest change in these standards around that workforce management is looking at your whole of operation, so everything from your reception to your admin staff, to your support staff, managers and so forth, and I think that's you know, as the standard says, the workforce is effectively managed. You know, effectively managed to ensure appropriate staffing to deliver services. So not just your training and assessment, but services across your whole operation.

Angela Connell-Richards: 2:35

Yeah, and when I think about services, I'm thinking about everything. It's not just the training that we're delivering, it's the support services that we're offering as well. It's the information we're providing to the students prior to course commencement. It's the support services that we're offering as well. It's the information we're providing to the students prior to course commencement. It's the issuing of the certificate. So it should be a holistic thing. So I I think it's a positive change. Um, yeah, and in particular, the next part in that is it facilitates access to continuing professional development opportunities to enable staff of the organization to effectively perform their role, and I think this is fantastic that they've brought this in. Yeah, what's?

Maciek Fibrich: 3:12

been your experience with staff? I think, yeah, I think, I think you, you, you, exactly what you've just said there is is really important in that for so long, we focused on training trainer and assessor professional development and not professional development of our whole team, and that again, we spoke about it last time when we start looking at compliance and the culture of compliance and the culture of continuous improvement and now risk management, it's really important that the whole workforce within your business understands the standards, what the implications are and how to manage those risks, not just, oh, that's the compliance manager's role or that's the trainer's role.

Angela Connell-Richards: 3:58

Yeah, yeah, it should be looking at the responsibilities of all within the organisation, and one of the things that I've really noted with that is position descriptions. It needs to be clear within the position descriptions who is responsible for compliance, which it should be everyone and to what level do they need that? And then so, when you think of the type of PD, what type of they do they need that? And then so, when you think of, um, the type of pd, what type of pd do you think would be essential for administration employees?

Maciek Fibrich: 4:34

okay, pd, from from an admin perspective, it comes down to even the basic understanding of the standards. Right, let's? Let's just ensure that the whole of organization understands why the standards exist, what the standards are designed for, that it's not just about you know sorry, pleasing asker or pleasing an auditor that the standards are actually built around good business management and good business practices and so having the team understand what every aspect of that is. So I think professional development as a basic concept should be that. And then breaking down the respective standards and clauses if we're still calling them that or the performance indicators, and ensuring which ones of those are aligned to which role within the business or which functional area if you don't have roles, and then making sure that there is emphasis around whether it's the student support clauses, that the student support staff understand, that the admin team know that and as well as the CEO, you know, the person that's legally responsible for this business fully understands all of the standards and how they apply and the implications within the business.

Angela Connell-Richards: 5:49

Yeah, the amount of times I've gone into an RTO and not only the staff don't understand what are the requirements, but even the CEO.

Maciek Fibrich: 6:00

Or you hear the comment again that wasn't. I didn't realise that was my job, I just, you know, I told the compliance officer and left it with them Again. You know I said a few months ago, I think you know, if you saw a light arcing, would you just walk away and say, oh, I told the WHS person. You know.

Angela Connell-Richards: 6:19

Yeah, yeah, that's all I'm supposed to do. Yeah, pass the buck. Yeah, okay, all right. So we've uh, we'll touch lightly on trainers and assessors, because there hasn't really been any major changes, other than they've softened their approach when it comes to trainer qualifications, and we did talk about this a little bit in the last podcast as well. So let's have a look at standard 3.3, where training and assessment is delivered by persons with current industry skills and knowledge relevant to the training product. Not much different when you think about trainers and assessors. But now they're bringing in where it engages experts for the purposes of delivering training. It does so, and how are they referencing that and how are they ensuring that the experts have the required skills and knowledge to be able to share that knowledge with the students? What do you think will be the major changes that RTOs need to look out for when it comes to experts?

Maciek Fibrich: 7:21

Look, I think we've always looked at having subject matter experts coming to an RTO and I believe that in the current standard it was a little bit challenging to do so because you weren't quite sure what skill set they needed to have.

Maciek Fibrich: 7:37

It's very wishy-washy yeah and so you always sort of questioned am I if I'm bringing someone in for a day of product information or you know what is the the implications there? This now at least makes it that you know when we engage experts, but it doesn't actually say for how long. So this opens up, I think, the ability for an RTO to start looking at bringing in experts from the field, potentially for even the duration of the course, maybe one day a week or however it is for the purpose, as it says a number of clients that when they look at delivering a qualification, there sometimes are situations where there's not one person in the country that holds their TAE and that full qualification in its entirety, because it's a new qualification or something's come up where you know, especially in the electrotechnology area, where people are sort of skilled in particular areas as opposed to the full qualification, and so this allows people to come in with specialist skills and knowledge to deliver those particular areas, but under the supervision of that RTO or a person that holds the required credentials.

Angela Connell-Richards: 8:55

Yeah, so I think that's a good thing. And I think so. One of the things that we've identified is putting together a register of these experts. So I think it would be good for RTOs to have a list of experts that they could possibly bring in who have skills in certain areas and, like you were talking about product experts. So I know you've worked in hairdressing area and I know there are a lot of product experts that you would bring in with hairdressing.

Maciek Fibrich: 9:27

Yeah, hair beauty building anything, any of those areas yeah.

Angela Connell-Richards: 9:31

Yeah, so part of it is. One of the requirements is it has a system in place for ensuring experts have industry competency, skills, knowledge and specialized industry. We were thinking, well, could this be a trainer's matrix that they could possibly want, even though they won't have the credentialing of a trainer assessor? But that's where I was also thinking. It could be a register, it could be trainer's matrix. Experts are only authorised to work under the direction of a person with appropriate credentials to provide direction on the delivery of training and assessment as specified in the credential policy. So that's pretty straightforward, I think.

Maciek Fibrich: 10:15

Yes, I think the concept like, if we break it down to the current standards, it's effectively training under supervision without the need to have that skill set that currently exists in the standards. So I think, again, this is a positive change. But the process behind it, like I said, it's very easy to put together a policy procedure or a process around working, delivering under supervision, which most organizations probably should have if they've been doing that previously matter expert mapping or matrix, where you know hopefully they'll hold the qualification that they're delivering or are superseded superseded and equivalent if you want to go there. But just being able to map out, to prove that the subject matter expert is an expert and why they are an expert, it shouldn't be overwhelming for anyone and it doesn't need to be war and peace, but it needs to be able to demonstrate, to demonstrate that you know why are they coming in as a subject matter expert yeah, and they're not bringing supervision yeah, and they're not bringing in someone who just completed their qualification and have no industry experience.

Angela Connell-Richards: 11:32

Yeah, which?

Maciek Fibrich: 11:33

which, unfortunately, we know that happens. And this is where I think this is opening up a whole world of a really good space. It's opening up a whole world of new people coming into the industry who want to impart or pass on their 20, 30 years of experience but don't have the desire to go in and get their Cert IV because why? You know and I've literally been talking to a few clients recently that want to add to scope but find it very difficult to find someone that has the experience in that vocation but then also has a Cert IV right. So this really does allow for that to open up and bring in experts to teach the next generation.

Angela Connell-Richards: 12:18

Yeah, yeah, yeah, I think so, and it's going to give much more flexibility for RTOs to be able to, because we've got seasoned trainers and assessors who don't necessarily have that currency in the workforce where they can bring in a fresh, different perspective by bringing in these experts. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Maciek Fibrich: 12:40

Yeah. So I think they're all great things, and I think they're, but again, this is not a shortcut for training providers, for RTOs, to bypass the system. I think it's again. We spoke about last during our last podcast about risk management and the approach that we need to, and again, these experts will ultimately fall under the banner of the 3.1, which is, the workforce is effectively managed and then also you know how their professional development is done. So if they're brought into the organisation as an expert, they still potentially will need to fall under that banner as well.

Angela Connell-Richards: 13:21

Yeah, yeah, yeah, definitely. Well, we've had another great conversation about these new standards and, if I can just talk, about one more thing though.

Maciek Fibrich: 13:31

Yeah, go for it, but it was that concept that we spoke about, where the expert is involved in assessment, and that co-assessing regime as well.

Angela Connell-Richards: 13:42

Yeah, so where the expert is involved in assessment judgment, they conduct the assessment alongside the trainer or assessor, so they're not making the assessment judgment on their own. But, yeah, it definitely will relieve some of the workload when it comes to trainers and assessors as well, and I think it's also going to create more engaging training for RTS. Yeah, look.

Maciek Fibrich: 14:05

I think so and we do have that ability for that co-assessment at the moment. But I also think there's a lot of people that don't necessarily understand the concept where you've got the qualified trainer and assessor that might not be necessarily the subject matter expert in that area facilitating the process of assessment, ensuring that the process is done, the documentation is done and then, alongside that person, the subject matter expert confirming that the actual actions and the way that the practical activity has been undertaken is in line with the standards and the marking guide and so forth. So it's a slightly more complicated process. But again, we go back to the days of when we had subject matter experts, with auditors that used to come in and audit RTOs. You know the auditor would ensure that the audit practice was undertaken correctly, but the subject matter expert would actually be the one that would be checking the assessment tools and the learning material and so forth. Those days were great in some respects.

Maciek Fibrich: 15:09

Yeah, when they were actually experts, but yeah, but we, you know, we had the industry training advisory, itabs and they would, you know, come along with the auditors, and so this is a similar thing, where you're bringing an expert in. They may have been involved in the training, but now they're going to be involved in the assessment but not making the ultimate decision. They are co-assessing in some respects.

Angela Connell-Richards: 15:38

Yeah, yeah, yeah. So I think overall it's a good area quality area to have included. It is one of the biggest changes, particularly standard 3.1 and 3.3, trainers and assessors. Not a lot has changed with that one, but it would be very interesting to see how RTOs implement this. What would be some key steps that you would offer to our audience on what they need to do first to comply with these requirements?

Maciek Fibrich: 16:11

So I was actually just thinking. You know, it's going to be interesting where organisations don't use industry experts, whether they turn out and say, well, we don't use them, so therefore we don't need to document them. And in some respects, whilst that might seem logical when you read the standards and the performance indicator says the RTO demonstrates it has systems in place for ensuring then experts have industry competencies, it doesn't sort of say if using. So my approach firstly would be to ensure that, whether you do or not use industry experts, to still have a process.

Angela Connell-Richards: 16:48

Because one day you might want to.

Maciek Fibrich: 16:50

Yeah, and so start by obviously analysing the standard or the performance indicator as a whole, as a paragraph, but then break down each of the words so experts have industry competence, or competencies, skills, knowledge, specialized industry, et cetera so that you're actually covering all of those areas in your processes, not just one of those. It's like when you're assessing students you know you're not just assessing one word, you're assessing the whole phrase as such. And also, the other thing that I would say is, when you are putting together your uh, your processes is, just really make sure that they fit your practices or the proposed practices that you're going to have, um, not just buying something off the shelf and then just accepting it as is. So, yeah, start by really analysing what is what you're going to be doing and then start documenting that accordingly.

Angela Connell-Richards: 17:50

Yeah, and I think it should be more focused around the size and scope of your operations. Yeah, that's what I was hearing when you were saying that, yeah. So, also for our audience, there are practice guides that are out there. We recently had the new practice guides for vet workforce come out, so I do recommend you check them out and check out what are the known risks and what are the quality outcomes that they're expecting ASQA expecting when it comes to self-assurance, that they're expecting ASQA expecting when it comes to self-assurance. There are some really good guides, tools there that you can use to help you with restructuring your policies and procedures and process what you're going to have in place.

Angela Connell-Richards: 18:33

Yeah, yeah. So thank you very much for joining me today, maychek. It's been a pleasure. As per usual, love having our chats when we get to dive into the training sector. Today we've delved into the standards for RTOs and focusing on those key areas where we're really looking at the vet workforce, engaging industry experts and the trainers, competencies and what's that impact going to be on your RTO. So we hope you've enjoyed this and got a lot out of it and learned some new strategies that you could implement into your RTO. So, yes, thank you very much, maychek, once again, and we look forward to catching up with you again soon, where Maychek will join me again next month, for where we'll be covering a few other areas under the new standards. Thanks, matej.

Maciek Fibrich: 19:26

Thank you.